Making babies: liberals versus conservatives
Categories: Love & sex, Pregnancy & birth, Development
I've been trying to figure out how to write about this for a while now. You see, I'm so far left that I'm up to my neck in the Pacific Ocean. So this worries me immensely. According to this article, conservatives are pumping out future voters in far greater numbers than us liberals. (Excepting the Duggars, of course, who I am quite certain are ultra-liberals.)This has been going on for the last thirty years, apparently, without anyone noticing. Now, I'm not saying this is a conspiracy or anything, but it is a disturbing trend. "When secular-minded Americans decide to have few, or no, children, they unwittingly give a strong evolutionary advantage to the other side of the culture divide," writes Phillip Longman, senior fellow at the New America Foundation. "If 'Metros' don't start having more children, America's future is 'Retro.' " And here I was thinking I was doing the right thing by not contributing to global over-population, when in reality, I'm just helping out the Republicans.
Liberals, in addition to being concerned about over-population and the planet's finite resources, also tend to be more open to using birth control, tend to live in cities where they have less room and money for children, and do not necessarily share the traditional view of large families as being an equally large blessing. And, despite the well-known (and fictional) example of Alex P. Keaton, children apparently overwhelmingly grow up to share their parents' political ideology.
So, what's an overworked, underpaid liberal to do? Should we head for the bedroom and start working on number 3? Or is this really nothing to worry about and it will all sort itself out in the long run? What do you think?
Recent Posts
- Technology Lets Parents 'Hold' Unborn Baby (7/06/2009)
- Strawberry Shortcake (7/06/2009)
- The Dingo's Got My Baby Name! (7/06/2009)
- Weekend Fun and Games (7/03/2009)
- Kids and Extracurriculars - When Do You Let Them Quit? (7/03/2009)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Meredith 9-30-2006 @ 3:48PM
I have to disagree about one point. It seems that most of my friends come from upper middle class Republican-leaning families and all, or at least the majority of them are now Democrats.
I would hope that instead of raising our children to share in our politcial leanings, we teach them that government needs to change and adjust with the times rather than staying stagnant in one party or another.
Because in truth, neither side seems to be worth a damn right now.
Reply
Jill 9-30-2006 @ 5:12PM
Yes, but if liberals say "look at all the options and choose what best suits you" and conservatives say "do it my way, the only right way", the imbalance increases even more. I see it as inevitable- one side sees millions of shades of gray, one side sees only black and white. More will agree on a set values to promote when there are only two for them to chose among.
Reply
jpark 9-30-2006 @ 6:56PM
I agree that many of my Democrat friends grew up in Republican families or with Republican parents. I think it all evens out in the end, because you have different events influencing people. Radicalism wasn't more common or visible in the late 1960s and 1970s because the parents of those people were more liberal generally, so there could be new events and trends influencing children being born today to make them more liberal or conservative.
Reply
Heidi 9-30-2006 @ 8:55PM
I came from an extremely liberal and political family, and somehow turned out pretty libertarian. I'd have to disagree with the statement that liberals see a million shades of grey. I grew up quite liberal and it was very black and white - Democrats were good, and Republicans were evil. Most of the liberals I know now are just the same, very black and white, and quite the same as the Republicans I now know.
Most of the people I know now that see those million shades of grey tend to be right in the center - the ones who don't register for a party at all when it comes time to vote.
I just recommend that from my own experience, before you start calling down the other side, stop and see if you don't have a bit of hypocrisy on your own.
Reply
ann adams 9-30-2006 @ 10:04PM
You'll love this.
http://theologica.blogspot.com/2006/09/saloncom-on-mars-hill.html
Reply
Christine 9-30-2006 @ 10:09PM
Roger, have you considered adoption? Then you don't have to worry about overpopulation, if that is something that is important to you.
Reply
LS 9-30-2006 @ 10:51PM
I can't believe nobody said it before me... that comment about the Duggars really cracked me up!
Reply
margalit 9-30-2006 @ 11:09PM
You're making the assumption that children always vote like their parents. Well, they don't. They might be influenced by their upbringing, but that doesn't mean they always agree with it. My brother the Republican has been affiliated with that party since high school, when he belonged to the Young Republicans (I KNOW.. it was mortifying!). He's the son of a socialist and a very liberal democrat. We don't know what the hell happened to him, but he's definately the Alex P Keaton of our family.
Plus, I live in very liberal Massachusetts and we're full of HUGE Irish families with tons of kids... and they're Democrats.
Reply
VL 9-30-2006 @ 11:14PM
This quote:
"When secular-minded Americans decide to have few, or no, children, they unwittingly give a strong evolutionary advantage to the other side of the culture divide," writes Phillip Longman, senior fellow at the New America Foundation. "If 'Metros' don't start having more children, America's future is 'Retro.' "
reminds me of this statement (made 106 years ago):
"The woman must be the housewife, the helpmeet of the homemaker, the wise and fearless mother of many healthy children. In one of Daudet's powerful and melancholy books he speaks of "the fear of maternity, the haunting terror of the young wife of the present day." When such words can be truthfully written of a nation, that nation is rotten to the heart's core. When men fear work or fear righteous war, when women fear motherhood, they tremble on the brink of doom; and well it is that they should vanish from the earth, where they are fit subjects for the scorn of all men and women who are themselves strong and brave and high-minded."
spoken by Teddy Roosevelt in 1900, when immigrants "threatened" to outnumber "natives" (Europeans).
Hmmm...
Aren't there are other ways I can help improve my country besides having more babies?
Reply
Sandy 10-01-2006 @ 1:31AM
Meridith said, "Because in truth, neither side seems to be worth a damn right now."
Hear! Hear!!!
Bunch of weanies, all of 'em.
Reply
sandy 10-01-2006 @ 1:31AM
VL asked, "Aren't there are other ways I can help improve my country besides having more babies? "
Yeah...have fewer babies and let the conservative babies grow up and improve the country!
(sorry, just couldn't resist that one)
Reply
n 10-01-2006 @ 10:02AM
VL, the ONLY way to fulfill your destiny and responsibility is to raise a healthy family. Working for AT&T as a glorified secretary will not contribute meaningfully to the Earth, nor will bagging groceries at Bi-Lo. Please, use your uterus.
Reply
VL 10-01-2006 @ 10:04AM
Hmm... not quite what I had in mind. Besides I already have more than I am supposed to as a liberal and my body has a strict "no returns" policy.
I think there needs to be something similar to "agnostic" for political beliefs. You know: "There might be something great out there to believe in but I just haven't seen it yet..."
Reply
ann adams 10-01-2006 @ 11:01AM
These days I cross my fingers and go with the lesser of the evils. Otherwise I deserve the government I get.
Reply
daisy 10-01-2006 @ 1:50PM
Roger, my family adopted a little boy because we didn't want to overpopulate and did want to be parents. I highly recommend it!
Reply
Bunny 10-01-2006 @ 4:50PM
It's irresponsible for anyone to bring more children into this war loving world. I'm with you 100 percent! The people who call themselves truly good Christians should consider there are over 100,000 children available for adoption in the US. They are the product of unplanned pregnancy's. Most of them were taken from parents who are drug or alcohol dependent (the parents picked drugs over their children). Very few of these children are under age nine because children's services return the children many times to the biological families to be molested and beaten again and again before putting them up for adoption. Because of this the majority of these children have serious behavioral problems and many have drug and alcohol issues themselves.
Given the situation, wouldn't the good Christian thing to do, be to first adopt these unwanted children, and give them loving homes. Second would be to assure birth control be free and readily available to these people who can't take care of themselves let alone a child.
I would think God would frown upon forcing children to be born into homes where drugs would be more important than the children. Would God find joy in knowing even more children will be molested, beaten, starved?
There is no reason for these unwanted teens to grow up in foster care, most are never adopted. There is no excuse for this when there are so many good Christians out there. Lack of money should not be an excuse, a true Christian would put their faith in the Lord to provide for them.
Reply
Angela 10-05-2006 @ 1:27PM
I am saying this as a liberal democrat, but democrats do NOT see "more shades of grey" as one of you posted. Most democrats I know seem to be just as close minded as most republicans....we just don't call it close minded because we happen to agree with the politics.
Reply